Alexander J. Bělohlávek, Univ. Professor, Dr.iur., Mgr., Dipl. Ing. oec/MB, Dr.h.c. Lawyer admitted and practising in Prague/CZE (Branch N.J./US), Senior Partner of the Law Offices Bělohlávek, Dept. of Law, Faculty of Economics, Ostrava, CZE, Dept. of Int. and European Law, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, Brno, CZE (visiting), Chairman of the Commission on Arbitration ICC National Committee CZE, Arbitrator in Prague, Vienna, Kiev etc. Member of ASA, DIS, Austrian Arb. Association. The President of the WJA – the World Jurist Association, Washington D.C./USA.
44.I. SCOPE OF SECTION 44 OF THE ARBACT Section 44 of the ArbAct mirrors Section 30 of the ArbAct,1 but here it facilitates the application, by analogy, of the Code of Civil Procedure for the procedure followed by a court in the exercise of control and supporting functions in relation to arbitration in cases where no specific procedure directly follows from the ArbAct. This is because, in the exercise of such powers (supporting and control functions), the courts primarily proceed in accordance with the ArbAct. Therefore, in these cases the Arbitration Act provides an exclusive substantive basis for judicial decisions. Nevertheless, it does not always provide the corresponding procedural basis. In such cases, the CCP is applied.